Talk:Khan Shaykhun chemical attack

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Khan Shaykhun chemical attack article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3: 3 months

WARNING: ACTIVE COMMUNITY SANCTIONS

The article Khan Shaykhun chemical attack, along with other pages relating to the Syrian Civil War and ISIL, is designated by the community as a contentious topic. The current restrictions are:

Limit of one revert in 24 hours: This article is under WP:1RR (one revert per editor per article per 24-hour period)

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned.

Remedy instructions and exemptions

Enforcement procedures:

Violations of any restrictions (excluding 1RR/reverting violations) and other conduct issues should be reported to the administrators' incidents noticeboard. Violations of revert restrictions should be reported to the administrators' edit warring noticeboard.
Editors who violate any listed restrictions may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.
An editor must be aware before they can be sanctioned.

With respect to any reverting restrictions:

Edits made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus are exempt from all edit-warring restrictions. In order to be considered "clearly established" the consensus must be proven by prior talk-page discussion.
Edits made which remove or otherwise change any material placed by clearly established consensus, without first obtaining consensus to do so, may be treated in the same manner as clear vandalism.
Clear vandalism of any origin may be reverted without restriction.
Reverts of edits made by anonymous (IP) editors that are not vandalism are exempt from the 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring. If you are in doubt, contact an administrator for assistance.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!

A news item involving Khan Shaykhun chemical attack was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 4 April 2017.

Wikipedia

Death Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Middle East

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Middle Eastern military history task force

Syria Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Syria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Syria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SyriaWikipedia:WikiProject SyriaTemplate:WikiProject SyriaSyria
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

UNDUE

Re [1]. We ALREADY record "Russian and Assadist" claims at great length. There's no reason to do it in like fifty paragraph with dozens of quotes from Putin's folks and Assad. The sections on Russian and Syrian "denials" are way too long and undue. So yes, they need to be trimmed of excessive unnecessary material. This is an encyclopedia, not a megaphone for Russian/Assadist propaganda.Volunteer Marek (talk) 14:26, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Quite right, this is an encyclopedia. This is not another megaphone for propagandists of interventionism from Voice of America. 2.132.234.204 (talk) 16:56, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't feel strongly, but just to note that the paragraphs and quotes trimmed and restored add up to 74KB, which is a large percentage of the article, and as far as I can see only anonymous IPs[2][3][4][5][6][7] have tried to restore the text, making it hard to argue there's any consensus from actual editors for restoration. BobFromBrockley (talk) 12:42, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Could it be that editors with a name and a reputation might not have the time or inclination to get dragged into AE by VM and his friends? I for one have stopped editing articles concerning these alleged chemical weapon attacks in Syria, ever since VM reverted my edit with the summary "rmv bad faithed POV attempts to poison the well" [[8]]. It was neither an attempt to poison a well, nor was it done in bad faithg (and VM's slur was totally in bad faith). An attempt to discuss the matter on his talk page failed (he blanked the entire page) [[9]]. That is kind of bad form, because proper WP:BRD practice when a dispute is not about content is to use the user talk page. VM doesn't know anything about me; he said so in an edit-summary when he deleted a more recent comment on his talk-page [[10]].

I certainly have no time for AE shenanigans. VM evidently does; in fact it's hard to see how he could hold down a full-time job while also engaging in editing the encyclopaedia as well as coming to AE to go to war with his opponents - he is an extremely prolific AE actor. Me - I'm retired. But I still don't have time to argue with aggressive wikilawyers on talk pages and in arbitration.

VM and a fairly small group of his friends seem to be all over anything that is politically sensitive, pushing a POV that appears to be essentially anti-russian (Eastern Europe esp. Poland, Trump, Syria).

So the fact that it is IPs that are trying to restore this text doesn't mean there is a consensus to delete it. Rather, I see a gang of POV editors with a mean attitude, suppressing sourced info that they disagree with. It's time some admin came along and sat on them. MrDemeanour (talk) 16:36, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Don't get me wrong; I'm no Putin lover. Nor do I like the way that Russia conducts itself on the world stage. I just don't like Wikipedia proclaiming that sarin attacks have definitely occurred, when the only evidence is video testimony from dubious witnesses. MrDemeanour (talk) 16:40, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is an important point that the article does not make clear. MrDemeanor says the only evidence is dubious; this should be fleshed out.Shakyvoice (talk) 15:57, 4 September 2018 (UTC)shakyvoice[reply]

Bureaucracy

Just a note to say that the indef semi-protect was not an AE action but rather falls under community-authorised discretionary sanctions. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:47, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

info

The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, with reference to the data of the organization “Swedish Doctors for Human Rights”, [13] named the staged videos of the chemical attack in Syria, distributed by Western media. According to the official representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Maria Zakharova, “this whole undertaking is clearly provocative in nature” [14].

http://www.mid.ru/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/2687802#6

http://www.interfax.ru/russia/557035

On October 14, Mikhail Ulyanov, director of the Department of Non-Proliferation of Arms Control of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, based on photographs of children affected by the Khan Sheikhun incident, concluded that they were “exposed to psychotropic substances”. Mikhail Ulyanov also doubted that an air bomb was used in Khan Sheikhun [11].

Subsequently, on the basis of a statement by the US State Department on the use of chemical weapons by the Khayyat Tahrir al-Sham group in Idlib province, Russian representatives concluded that the American side had actually admitted the guilt of the group in a chemical attack [12].

http://www.interfax.ru/world/583169/

https://ria.ru/radio_brief/20171020/1507235942.html

--145.255.169.213 (talk) 20:53, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, comrade. Would add, that Snopes.com has a good section on Russian claims of psychotropic substances. 2A00:23C7:E287:E001:F8EC:CFB4:92BA:D35E (talk) 10:25, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 11 December 2021

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

File:Khan Shaykhun chemical attack victim sketch by Marc Nelson @marcnelsonart.jpg

Khan Shaykhun chemical attack victim sketch by Marc Nelson @marcnelsonart

Marcnelsonart (talk) 13:37, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wanted to add this drawing based on an eyewitness photo. Marcnelsonart (talk) 13:38, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. —Sirdog (talk) 14:10, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

~~I wouldn't support this request. I think our policies would not support getting as emotional as to add someone's drawings.Polska jest Najważniejsza (talk) 17:02, 11 December 2021 (UTC)~~ strike sock - Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Miacek[reply]